As always, the actual report has the info in an objective manner without any color: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
>Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 165,000 in October, and the unemployment rate changed
little at 4.1 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment increased in
professional and business services, in health care, and in transportation and warehousing.
Both the unemployment rate, at 4.1 percent, and the number of unemployed people, at 7.1 million,
changed little in October. The unemployment rate has remained in a narrow range of 4.1 percent to
4.3 percent since March. (See table A-1.)
Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates showed little or no change in October for
adult men (3.9 percent), adult women (3.6 percent), teenagers (13.9 percent), and people who are
White (3.7 percent), Black (6.6 percent), Asian (2.8 percent), or Hispanic (4.7 percent). (See
tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)
The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more), at 2.0 million, changed
little over the month. The long-term unemployed accounted for 27.6 percent of all unemployed
people. (See table A-12.)
Both the labor force participation rate, at 61.9 percent, and the employment-population ratio, at
59.3 percent, changed little in October. These measures have shown little net change since January.
(See table A-1.)
The number of people employed part time for economic reasons increased by 339,000 to 4.8 million in
October. These individuals would have preferred full-time employment but were working part time
because their hours had been reduced or they were unable to find full-time jobs. (See table A-8.)
In October, the number of people not in the labor force who currently want a job changed little at
6.0 million. These individuals were not counted as unemployed because they were not actively
looking for work during the 4 weeks preceding the survey or were unavailable to take a job. (See
table A-1.)
Among those not in the labor force who wanted a job, the number of people marginally attached to
the labor force changed little at 1.6 million in October. These individuals wanted and were
available for work and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months but had not looked for
work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. The number of discouraged workers, a subset of the
marginally attached who believed that no jobs were available for them, also changed little over
the month at 448,000. (See Summary table A.)
U6 is definitely one to keep an eye on, while the headline unemployment figures may remain more steady until things deteriorate further U6 tends to be a bit of a leading indicator at times.
It’s been steadily rising since 2023 or so, however it’s worth noting that it peaked in December of last year and has declined a fair bit since then.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/u6rate
I wouldn’t call it elevated currently, but the trend is something to keep an eye on over time.
As always, it's helpful to look at the context of the longer term trends.
This graph shows the number of part-time workers for economic reasons (could only find part time work, or given part time hours because of business conditions).
And the other thing is that FRED has graphs of every number on any of these tables described in the report. Here's Table A-8.
Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 165,000 in October, higher than the average monthly gain
of 48,000 over the prior 12 months. In October, employment increased in professional and business
services, in health care, and in transportation and warehousing. (See table B-1.)
Employment in professional and business services increased by 70,000 in October, well above the
average monthly gain of 15,000 over the prior 12 months. In October, employment continued to trend
up in professional, scientific, and technical services (+33,000), in administrative and support and
waste management and remediation services (+28,000), and in management of companies and enterprises
(+9,000). Professional and business services has added 269,000 jobs since a recent low in October
2025.
Health care added 42,000 jobs in October, higher than the average monthly gain of 31,000 over the
prior 12 months. In October, employment gains occurred in hospitals (+16,000), home health care
services (+11,000), and outpatient care centers (+5,000).
In October, transportation and warehousing added 25,000 jobs, reflecting growth in couriers and
messengers (+17,000) and air transportation (+4,000). Transportation and warehousing has added
104,000 jobs since a recent employment low in February, with couriers and messengers (+71,000)
contributing most of the gain.
Manufacturing employment continued to trend up in October (+19,000) and has increased by 101,000
since a recent low in December 2025. In October, job gains occurred in computer and electronic
product manufacturing (+7,000), machinery manufacturing (+4,000), and primary metal manufacturing
(+4,000).
Employment showed little change over the month in other major industries, including mining,
quarrying, and oil and gas extraction; construction; wholesale trade; retail trade; information;
financial activities; social assistance; leisure and hospitality; other services; and government.
In October, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls increased by 14
cents, or 0.4 percent, to $38.00. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased
by 3.1 percent. In October, average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory
employees rose by 12 cents, or 0.4 percent, to $32.75. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)
The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls remained at 34.4 hours in
October. In manufacturing, the average workweek was unchanged at 40.5 hours, and overtime edged up
by 0.1 hour to 3.1 hours. The average workweek for production and nonsupervisory employees on
private nonfarm payrolls declined by 0.1 hour to 33.8 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for August was revised up by 53,000, from +133,000
to +186,000, and the change for September was revised up by 31,000, from +29,000 to +60,000. With
these revisions, employment in August and September combined is 84,000 higher than previously
reported. (Monthly revisions result from additional reports received from businesses and government
agencies since the last published estimates and from the recalculation of seasonal factors.)
What stands out to me as a lay reader (but someone who is part of the labor market and thus has a bit of a view and a vested interest of course) is the rise in prof and biz services, contrary to the going narrative that white collar roles will be decimated by AI. Not trying to say there is a slam dunk story here, but coupled with other data points like the recent Gartner report on AI productivity / capex and what we are seeing in the equity markets, it does make me wonder if a bit of an economic referendum on the trajectory of AI is starting to come together.
I’ve thought for a while that the fear mongering around AI is a bit much. I’m certain it will be replacing jobs, I use AI regularly and it’s allowed me to reduce my need for some other help - but generally what that’s meant is it’s freeing up other employees for higher and better uses. I’m sure there will be plenty of jobs that are eventually eliminated, but much like many technological advancements, the labor markets will reshape and new roles will be found.
Regardless, I don’t think any of that is happening fast. AI has spread quickly in tech, but many others are slower to adopt and much more concerned about full trust in the models before offloading tasks. For instance, if you’re coding it’s easy enough to have Claude replace a junior programmer - you’re still reviewing their code and not letting them touch anything important. But in Finance if I offload a task to Claude and it misses something we might see real money disappear, that’s a problem.
It’s coming, but not nearly as quickly as the doomers suggest.
That is generally my read as well. There is also the demographic side of things - I remember a McK report from a year or so ago that basically said all the AI in the world wouldn’t replace the Boomers aging out. Of course, I suppose true AGI would change the calculus, but still. And the viewpoints here on Reddit do tend to skew doomer, probably because there is such an (statistically speaking) over representation of software engineers, who are in a field that really is being disrupted by the tech.
I just don’t understand the AI is going to replace everyone thesis. Yes, it will ding some people and make jobs change but I have never worked at a company where the predominant issue is lack of knowledge or the speed at which PowerPoints/Excel spreadsheets update or pace of developers writing new code.
Nobody I talk to has these specific issues either. The main problems most people I talk to have at their place of employment are staffing shortages or underfunding of critical components.
Maybe I’m too optimistic but the knowledge portion of the economy is already VERY efficient. AI will boost productivity but I full expect it be like a 1% increase compounding over the next decade to be meaningful but nothing like hitting a light switch that the AI companies proclaim.
And she’s expressed continued support for the accuracy of the figures the BLS continues to publish, I’m not sure what your implication here is?
I would say it’s clear you weren’t someone who knew her, otherwise you probably wouldn’t be trying to undermine what she’s repeatedly communicated to the public.
They seem like they’re trying to imply they are intimately aware of how the process works. But they obviously don’t. Those numbers are difficult to fake because the data is publicly available and the collection is not centralized.
Yeah, tbh I’m fairly sure they’re bullshitting even being close to the situation, because everyone who’s familiar with the BLS in any measurable way consistently expresses the same sentiment.
I’d rely heavier on ADP and private company payroll stats. And yes anyone who has worked with government agencies knows sample sizes can be bias sampled to paint the picture they want ppl to see.
I would definitely not, ADP is fine for what it is but their quality of output is nowhere near the BLS. They have fairly extensive history of a standard error that’s well beyond normal statistical noise.
> anyone who has worked with government agencies knows sample sizes can be bias
This is derived from the Census Bureau’s current population survey, is your suggestion that the sampling in that is heavily biased and just nobody at all has noticed? Not a single statistician or economist who regularly uses that data? You realize these demographics and details are all widely available, so people can easily check the sampling, right?
For someone claiming to be very close to the process you seem to be completely unfamiliar with the topic.
Obviously you have a different experience than what I have. I can only speak from my experience working with GOVt and what I see in my community with and network in increase of layoffs and unemployment. And with doge I doubt we added +100k govt jobs. I have also always trusted BLS stats in the past it’s just recently that I’ve started requesting a second opinion to validate their output.
Yes, and so far the only two things that you’ve said based off said alleged experience is to first immediately try and undermine the actual words of the BLS official you were wanting to cite then second suggest the Census bureau’s current population survey has all of the sudden developed significant sampling bias and nobody at all in the statistician communities involved or using that data noticed.
In general revision behavior is random across normalized economic situations. When the job market is deteriorating you tend to get more negative revisions, and when it’s improving you tend to get more positive ones, but that has to be during periods of significant change not slow trend. It has to do with how survey data reaches the BLS, and that slower responding companies tend to also be those going through more change.
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for August was revised up by 53,000, from +133,000
to +186,000, and the change for September was revised up by 31,000, from +29,000 to +60,000. With
these revisions, employment in August and September combined is 84,000 higher than previously
reported.
People seem to act like revisions are something that’s intentionally hidden or something, despite them being a major aspect of every release. IDK, it’s this “here’s what they don’t want you to know” that’s actually something every knows because “they” are telling us regularly lol.
It’s one of those things that people think is a criticism but is actually a confession, in this case the confession being that the person has never really read these releases before and largely their understanding of a jobs report comes from news headlines.
You are misunderstanding the joke. It’s that on Reddit, you can’t acknowledge that job reports have generally been revised up this year because everyone on here wants to doom
I see tons of comments on reddit that are some version of 'we can't talk about that' or 'reddit won't admit this' as if it's rare opinion. You're just doing the most reddit thing ever, which is thinking your smarter and more informed than everyone else lol
I mean, that comment goes both ways on Reddit, there’s more people in this sub that genuinely think that the government is trying to hide revisions or whatever. So if it was a joke it wasn’t a very good one, given that it wasn’t discernible from normal comments here.
The WSJ just did a whole podcast how all the tech company c suite executives are trying to downsize but instead of letting people go they are buying them out to leave
Those number may seem big but they’re really not in the grand scheme. I’d Microsoft is offering 60k buyouts, they probably want at least 40k gone. Thats not a huge number over a couple months in terms of national unemployment. They probably do have an outsized impact though because of the type of jobs and the pay of those roles but not in qty.
This type of thinking “40k is not big” is incompatible with how money works in the U.S. and also pretty meaningless. My mortgage to a bank is “not big in the grand scheme of things” since it’s not even 1% of the multimillions they manage… but if I don’t pay, they will come after me, it will impact my credit rating, ability to make purchases, the bank will claim it, spend money to take the house, employ a legal team for cases like mine etc.
We need to start talking about “the consequences for those impacted directly and indirectly” instead.
That could be cheaper that trying to lay them off.
Either way that would not really affect unemployment. It simply means once they were bought out they either left the labor force or they were hired at another firm. Either is okay. A person leaving the labor force could be they were older decided to retire while the other points a stronger labor market than expected.
Getting or not getting unemployment insurance doesn't have any bearing on the unemployment numbers being reported by the BLS. If you lose or leave your job and are looking for another one, you are counted as unemployed.
Fuckin love Reddit, people up in the replies demanding proof as if this isn’t literally published as part of every report and kept on a central grid that’s easily accessible.
So many in this sub come in hot with skepticism not realizing they’re confessing that they’ve never read a single report in doing so lol.
the request for the link was not from me, nor am i calling you dishonest. But, I would question the growth in jobs the three months leading into an election (no matter the now results).
I would also honestly question any information coming from this administration. Not saying the numbers the staff put forward, but questioning the numbers reported
The rolling 3 month average is like 135,000ish jobs/mo. This is like suggesting you find someone telling you their dick is a fair bit below average to be worth questioning.
But in this case they also gave you full access to the measurement devices, the dick itself, the measure used, how it was implemented, the actual 16ths of each inch individually so you can compile it yourself, etc.
Nah, I can lead you to water but I can't force you to take a drink. Go find us a legitimate source that says otherwise or shut up and listen for once while the grownups are talking.
My guy literally all of this is published front and center on the BLS site, all you’ve got to do is look. Sitting there and pretending like this is obscure information they need to prove is just you confessing you’re completely unfamiliar with the topic.
This sub has got to be one of the most doomer subs on Reddit. Every post with even a slight tinge of good news (especially if it involves the US) is immediately flooded with “well, actually” comments, most of which are flat out stupid and uninformed.
What I'm gathering from the string growth in the transportation and warehouse sectors gaining employment rapidly is that companies have been expecting some kind of economic reprieve after the midterms for at least two months. They priced in either Democrats removing tariffs or Republicans rolling back something or other I'd suppose, and the law regarding trucking hours being up to 14 a day maximum are something related too
I mean, re-industrialisation is kinda a bipartisan issue too, so reductions in trade barriers and some industrial policy stuff would add to that thesis. I doubt we'll see incentives close to the CHIPS act until the 2028 election though unfortunately
Didn't we just see a correction of over a million jobs that were inaccurately counted as added? Curious to see in a few months just what the damage current policies did to the job market in '26 was.
Life would be so much better if the corporations and billionaires actually implemented over a million new jobs. They keep us distracted through decent work, we get fed with a decent life. It's so simple. They'll easily choose anything but.
At this point I am just waiting for the revision since its more then likely this number is heavily overstated especially in professional services category. Tend line is clear over the last 10 months its gets revised down
Hahaha ... Donnie must be so pissed that this comes out literally 2 days after an absolute slaughter of the Republican party nationwide. Granted, this is one month and anything is possible in terms of "blips" on the radar in terms of job reports. But still, you just know it must be eating away at him that a decent number for the economy popped out just days after the mid-terms.
Is this at all effected by those layoffs of the people who calculate and keep track of these things I heard about back when Trump got into office? I remember people saying they wouldn't trust the numbers after Trump fired a bunch of economists. He was complaining a lot about people making him look bad by putting out bad numbers but I don't recall who he fired or hired.
Nah, the best bellweather here is to see what economists are saying - especially those on the left. You’ve got people like Krugman and Sahm who are pretty openly liberal (Krugman basically being a political commentator at this point) and every one of them continues to express support for the BLS and it’s accuracy.
If you’re curious you can go to their website and click around, you can download piles and piles of raw data related to these reports, economists are constantly doing it for various analysis they’re working on. It would be effectively impossible to manipulate that data given the breadth and depth coupled with constant transparency without everyone knowing.
No, that’s just political huff. The jobs numbers were actually a bit better last year than they have been this year. Every initial report last year had to be revised down, while the majority (7/10) this year needed to be revised up.
Thank You Trump!!! We are truly in the GOLDEN AGE of economic growth all because of our president Donald J Trump's policies and the RADICAL Left does NOT want to admit this! (no sarcasm)
Yes! Trump is a genius. It’s his business ideas that are making so much money for the country. He also knows how to end ALL wars while he enjoys DECORATING our White House in his free time. What an incredible, beautiful man with an incredible ass. How JEALOUS are we of his wife having access to him every night????
Fucking Texas is turning blue and the troglodytes on the right are still trying to pretend like anyone aside from senile Fox News addicts are buying the “radical left” line lol
Higher taxes on the top 1%, wealth taxes, more welfare spending/social assistance, trans acceptance, and having the government step and be the sole provider in the pharmaceutical, medical and education industries
This is radical to you? Taking care of people? Having slightly higher taxes in the country with the lowest taxes of any developed nation? The audacity to suggest that the government need not regulate someone’s private parts?
What happens when things like pouring waste and toxic chemicals into a local river is cheaper and produces more profit for a company than properly disposing of it. In an unfettered free market, what stops all the companies from just polluting our environment unchecked?
At one point in time over the past year there was a guy in this sub who went into detail about how these numbers are put together and how the data is collected. It has nothing to do with trump. I have no idea how to go about finding the post/posts where he explained it all. Maybe someone else (or that same guy) can expand on this.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
As always, the actual report has the info in an objective manner without any color: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
>Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 165,000 in October, and the unemployment rate changed little at 4.1 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment increased in professional and business services, in health care, and in transportation and warehousing.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
Household survey data:
Both the unemployment rate, at 4.1 percent, and the number of unemployed people, at 7.1 million, changed little in October. The unemployment rate has remained in a narrow range of 4.1 percent to 4.3 percent since March. (See table A-1.)
Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates showed little or no change in October for adult men (3.9 percent), adult women (3.6 percent), teenagers (13.9 percent), and people who are White (3.7 percent), Black (6.6 percent), Asian (2.8 percent), or Hispanic (4.7 percent). (See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)
The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more), at 2.0 million, changed little over the month. The long-term unemployed accounted for 27.6 percent of all unemployed people. (See table A-12.)
Both the labor force participation rate, at 61.9 percent, and the employment-population ratio, at 59.3 percent, changed little in October. These measures have shown little net change since January. (See table A-1.)
The number of people employed part time for economic reasons increased by 339,000 to 4.8 million in October. These individuals would have preferred full-time employment but were working part time because their hours had been reduced or they were unable to find full-time jobs. (See table A-8.)
In October, the number of people not in the labor force who currently want a job changed little at 6.0 million. These individuals were not counted as unemployed because they were not actively looking for work during the 4 weeks preceding the survey or were unavailable to take a job. (See table A-1.)
Among those not in the labor force who wanted a job, the number of people marginally attached to the labor force changed little at 1.6 million in October. These individuals wanted and were available for work and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months but had not looked for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. The number of discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached who believed that no jobs were available for them, also changed little over the month at 448,000. (See Summary table A.)
crowcawer | an hour ago
So the linked CNBC article is celebrating the people working part time because they aren’t able to find full time work?
In the past I’d assume these are temporary postings. However, the healthcare positions may turn out to be lingering.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
U6 is definitely one to keep an eye on, while the headline unemployment figures may remain more steady until things deteriorate further U6 tends to be a bit of a leading indicator at times.
It’s been steadily rising since 2023 or so, however it’s worth noting that it peaked in December of last year and has declined a fair bit since then.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/u6rate
I wouldn’t call it elevated currently, but the trend is something to keep an eye on over time.
Already-Price-Tin | an hour ago
As always, it's helpful to look at the context of the longer term trends.
This graph shows the number of part-time workers for economic reasons (could only find part time work, or given part time hours because of business conditions).
And the other thing is that FRED has graphs of every number on any of these tables described in the report. Here's Table A-8.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
Establishment data:
Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 165,000 in October, higher than the average monthly gain of 48,000 over the prior 12 months. In October, employment increased in professional and business services, in health care, and in transportation and warehousing. (See table B-1.)
Employment in professional and business services increased by 70,000 in October, well above the average monthly gain of 15,000 over the prior 12 months. In October, employment continued to trend up in professional, scientific, and technical services (+33,000), in administrative and support and waste management and remediation services (+28,000), and in management of companies and enterprises (+9,000). Professional and business services has added 269,000 jobs since a recent low in October 2025.
Health care added 42,000 jobs in October, higher than the average monthly gain of 31,000 over the prior 12 months. In October, employment gains occurred in hospitals (+16,000), home health care services (+11,000), and outpatient care centers (+5,000).
In October, transportation and warehousing added 25,000 jobs, reflecting growth in couriers and messengers (+17,000) and air transportation (+4,000). Transportation and warehousing has added 104,000 jobs since a recent employment low in February, with couriers and messengers (+71,000) contributing most of the gain.
Manufacturing employment continued to trend up in October (+19,000) and has increased by 101,000 since a recent low in December 2025. In October, job gains occurred in computer and electronic product manufacturing (+7,000), machinery manufacturing (+4,000), and primary metal manufacturing (+4,000).
Employment showed little change over the month in other major industries, including mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction; construction; wholesale trade; retail trade; information; financial activities; social assistance; leisure and hospitality; other services; and government.
In October, average hourly earnings for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls increased by 14 cents, or 0.4 percent, to $38.00. Over the past 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased by 3.1 percent. In October, average hourly earnings of private-sector production and nonsupervisory employees rose by 12 cents, or 0.4 percent, to $32.75. (See tables B-3 and B-8.)
The average workweek for all employees on private nonfarm payrolls remained at 34.4 hours in October. In manufacturing, the average workweek was unchanged at 40.5 hours, and overtime edged up by 0.1 hour to 3.1 hours. The average workweek for production and nonsupervisory employees on private nonfarm payrolls declined by 0.1 hour to 33.8 hours. (See tables B-2 and B-7.)
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for August was revised up by 53,000, from +133,000 to +186,000, and the change for September was revised up by 31,000, from +29,000 to +60,000. With these revisions, employment in August and September combined is 84,000 higher than previously reported. (Monthly revisions result from additional reports received from businesses and government agencies since the last published estimates and from the recalculation of seasonal factors.)
BackupSlides | an hour ago
Thanks for the raw data as always.
What stands out to me as a lay reader (but someone who is part of the labor market and thus has a bit of a view and a vested interest of course) is the rise in prof and biz services, contrary to the going narrative that white collar roles will be decimated by AI. Not trying to say there is a slam dunk story here, but coupled with other data points like the recent Gartner report on AI productivity / capex and what we are seeing in the equity markets, it does make me wonder if a bit of an economic referendum on the trajectory of AI is starting to come together.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
I’ve thought for a while that the fear mongering around AI is a bit much. I’m certain it will be replacing jobs, I use AI regularly and it’s allowed me to reduce my need for some other help - but generally what that’s meant is it’s freeing up other employees for higher and better uses. I’m sure there will be plenty of jobs that are eventually eliminated, but much like many technological advancements, the labor markets will reshape and new roles will be found.
Regardless, I don’t think any of that is happening fast. AI has spread quickly in tech, but many others are slower to adopt and much more concerned about full trust in the models before offloading tasks. For instance, if you’re coding it’s easy enough to have Claude replace a junior programmer - you’re still reviewing their code and not letting them touch anything important. But in Finance if I offload a task to Claude and it misses something we might see real money disappear, that’s a problem.
It’s coming, but not nearly as quickly as the doomers suggest.
BackupSlides | an hour ago
That is generally my read as well. There is also the demographic side of things - I remember a McK report from a year or so ago that basically said all the AI in the world wouldn’t replace the Boomers aging out. Of course, I suppose true AGI would change the calculus, but still. And the viewpoints here on Reddit do tend to skew doomer, probably because there is such an (statistically speaking) over representation of software engineers, who are in a field that really is being disrupted by the tech.
Tough_Journalist400 | an hour ago
I just don’t understand the AI is going to replace everyone thesis. Yes, it will ding some people and make jobs change but I have never worked at a company where the predominant issue is lack of knowledge or the speed at which PowerPoints/Excel spreadsheets update or pace of developers writing new code. Nobody I talk to has these specific issues either. The main problems most people I talk to have at their place of employment are staffing shortages or underfunding of critical components.
Maybe I’m too optimistic but the knowledge portion of the economy is already VERY efficient. AI will boost productivity but I full expect it be like a 1% increase compounding over the next decade to be meaningful but nothing like hitting a light switch that the AI companies proclaim.
getwhirleddotcom | 2 minutes ago
> Maybe I’m too optimistic but the knowledge portion of the economy is already VERY efficient.
Curious what you mean by this.
mlopez1120 | an hour ago
The old BIS was fired by trump cause he didn’t like the stats she was putting out. Source: I was working with her agency at the time she got fired.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
And she’s expressed continued support for the accuracy of the figures the BLS continues to publish, I’m not sure what your implication here is?
I would say it’s clear you weren’t someone who knew her, otherwise you probably wouldn’t be trying to undermine what she’s repeatedly communicated to the public.
EchoFieldHorizon | an hour ago
They seem like they’re trying to imply they are intimately aware of how the process works. But they obviously don’t. Those numbers are difficult to fake because the data is publicly available and the collection is not centralized.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
Yeah, tbh I’m fairly sure they’re bullshitting even being close to the situation, because everyone who’s familiar with the BLS in any measurable way consistently expresses the same sentiment.
mlopez1120 | 30 minutes ago
I’d rely heavier on ADP and private company payroll stats. And yes anyone who has worked with government agencies knows sample sizes can be bias sampled to paint the picture they want ppl to see.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | 22 minutes ago
I would definitely not, ADP is fine for what it is but their quality of output is nowhere near the BLS. They have fairly extensive history of a standard error that’s well beyond normal statistical noise.
> anyone who has worked with government agencies knows sample sizes can be bias
This is derived from the Census Bureau’s current population survey, is your suggestion that the sampling in that is heavily biased and just nobody at all has noticed? Not a single statistician or economist who regularly uses that data? You realize these demographics and details are all widely available, so people can easily check the sampling, right?
For someone claiming to be very close to the process you seem to be completely unfamiliar with the topic.
Be serious here my man.
mlopez1120 | 17 minutes ago
Obviously you have a different experience than what I have. I can only speak from my experience working with GOVt and what I see in my community with and network in increase of layoffs and unemployment. And with doge I doubt we added +100k govt jobs. I have also always trusted BLS stats in the past it’s just recently that I’ve started requesting a second opinion to validate their output.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | 4 minutes ago
Yes, and so far the only two things that you’ve said based off said alleged experience is to first immediately try and undermine the actual words of the BLS official you were wanting to cite then second suggest the Census bureau’s current population survey has all of the sudden developed significant sampling bias and nobody at all in the statistician communities involved or using that data noticed.
It’s difficult to take this seriously.
EchoFieldHorizon | an hour ago
Those numbers are difficult to fake because the data is publicly available and is independently reviewed.
Someinterestingbs-td | an hour ago
And im sure that number will turn out be much much smaller. Just like all the other jobs reports we have gotten this year.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
The revisions in this report were up.
In general revision behavior is random across normalized economic situations. When the job market is deteriorating you tend to get more negative revisions, and when it’s improving you tend to get more positive ones, but that has to be during periods of significant change not slow trend. It has to do with how survey data reaches the BLS, and that slower responding companies tend to also be those going through more change.
Bullboah | an hour ago
Of the 10 monthly jobs reports this year;
3 were revised downwards. 7 were revised up.
RonaldWoodstock | an hour ago
Falling for reddit propaganda
So_HauserAspen | an hour ago
I think the primary driver of the jobs was the end of drumpf's illegal tariffs and the election cycle.
newbizhigh | an hour ago
And the astonishing part...
Technical-Revenue-48 | an hour ago
Shhh we can’t talk about that
UnableChard2613 | an hour ago
Why not?
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
People seem to act like revisions are something that’s intentionally hidden or something, despite them being a major aspect of every release. IDK, it’s this “here’s what they don’t want you to know” that’s actually something every knows because “they” are telling us regularly lol.
It’s one of those things that people think is a criticism but is actually a confession, in this case the confession being that the person has never really read these releases before and largely their understanding of a jobs report comes from news headlines.
Technical-Revenue-48 | 36 minutes ago
You are misunderstanding the joke. It’s that on Reddit, you can’t acknowledge that job reports have generally been revised up this year because everyone on here wants to doom
FlightlessBabyBirb | 29 minutes ago
I see tons of comments on reddit that are some version of 'we can't talk about that' or 'reddit won't admit this' as if it's rare opinion. You're just doing the most reddit thing ever, which is thinking your smarter and more informed than everyone else lol
RIP_Soulja_Slim | 25 minutes ago
I mean, that comment goes both ways on Reddit, there’s more people in this sub that genuinely think that the government is trying to hide revisions or whatever. So if it was a joke it wasn’t a very good one, given that it wasn’t discernible from normal comments here.
Quirky-Group4079 | an hour ago
The WSJ just did a whole podcast how all the tech company c suite executives are trying to downsize but instead of letting people go they are buying them out to leave
1098duc_w_the_termi | an hour ago
Those number may seem big but they’re really not in the grand scheme. I’d Microsoft is offering 60k buyouts, they probably want at least 40k gone. Thats not a huge number over a couple months in terms of national unemployment. They probably do have an outsized impact though because of the type of jobs and the pay of those roles but not in qty.
Austin1975 | 43 minutes ago
This type of thinking “40k is not big” is incompatible with how money works in the U.S. and also pretty meaningless. My mortgage to a bank is “not big in the grand scheme of things” since it’s not even 1% of the multimillions they manage… but if I don’t pay, they will come after me, it will impact my credit rating, ability to make purchases, the bank will claim it, spend money to take the house, employ a legal team for cases like mine etc.
We need to start talking about “the consequences for those impacted directly and indirectly” instead.
post-death_wave_core | 15 minutes ago
Microsoft said they expect 5% of the 60k to take the buyout.
Marathon2021 | 47 minutes ago
Got a link to that episode?
SleepingRiver | an hour ago
That could be cheaper that trying to lay them off.
Either way that would not really affect unemployment. It simply means once they were bought out they either left the labor force or they were hired at another firm. Either is okay. A person leaving the labor force could be they were older decided to retire while the other points a stronger labor market than expected.
InspireMe237 | 20 minutes ago
I had a buyout years ago and the company allowed ex employees to get unemployment. In my care, I was part of the stats.
reasonably_plausible | 11 minutes ago
Getting or not getting unemployment insurance doesn't have any bearing on the unemployment numbers being reported by the BLS. If you lose or leave your job and are looking for another one, you are counted as unemployed.
TheDadThatGrills | an hour ago
For those who are quick to say these numbers are all false and will be revised downwards:
RIP_Soulja_Slim | 33 minutes ago
Fuckin love Reddit, people up in the replies demanding proof as if this isn’t literally published as part of every report and kept on a central grid that’s easily accessible.
So many in this sub come in hot with skepticism not realizing they’re confessing that they’ve never read a single report in doing so lol.
Anonymous-BatDude | 43 minutes ago
Nice try. Link the sources.
TheDadThatGrills | 40 minutes ago
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.htm
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_11062026.htm
Why can't you look this up yourself before accusing me of being dishonest?
CmonRetirement | 35 minutes ago
the request for the link was not from me, nor am i calling you dishonest. But, I would question the growth in jobs the three months leading into an election (no matter the now results).
I would also honestly question any information coming from this administration. Not saying the numbers the staff put forward, but questioning the numbers reported
RIP_Soulja_Slim | 14 minutes ago
The rolling 3 month average is like 135,000ish jobs/mo. This is like suggesting you find someone telling you their dick is a fair bit below average to be worth questioning.
But in this case they also gave you full access to the measurement devices, the dick itself, the measure used, how it was implemented, the actual 16ths of each inch individually so you can compile it yourself, etc.
Be serious here…
Anonymous-BatDude | 13 minutes ago
The official website of the U.S. Government? 😂😂 okay please give me something not tied to this administration.
TheDadThatGrills | 6 minutes ago
Nah, I can lead you to water but I can't force you to take a drink. Go find us a legitimate source that says otherwise or shut up and listen for once while the grownups are talking.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | 35 minutes ago
My guy literally all of this is published front and center on the BLS site, all you’ve got to do is look. Sitting there and pretending like this is obscure information they need to prove is just you confessing you’re completely unfamiliar with the topic.
Logical-Boss8158 | 11 minutes ago
This sub has got to be one of the most doomer subs on Reddit. Every post with even a slight tinge of good news (especially if it involves the US) is immediately flooded with “well, actually” comments, most of which are flat out stupid and uninformed.
Fit_Kangaroo_3437 | 2 minutes ago
Well actually every single jobs report has been revised down since Trump was elected so we aren’t doomers you’re just ignorant
bmur90 | 9 minutes ago
Reddit is filled with basement dwellers who can't succeed and they want everyone else to be failures too in order to validate their miserable lives
Spiritual-Maybe-6720 | 7 minutes ago
because that logic usually holds. Literally you look at the revision done by BLS over the last year the number has been trending down
Logical-Boss8158 | 4 minutes ago
July - September have all been adjusted upward. It nets out in the end. Pretending it doesn’t is stupid.
personman_76 | an hour ago
What I'm gathering from the string growth in the transportation and warehouse sectors gaining employment rapidly is that companies have been expecting some kind of economic reprieve after the midterms for at least two months. They priced in either Democrats removing tariffs or Republicans rolling back something or other I'd suppose, and the law regarding trucking hours being up to 14 a day maximum are something related too
Itchy-Professional16 | 49 minutes ago
this is the type of speculation that is interesting. and yes, I agree. seems like trade may be liberalized boosting this sector.
defaultedebt | 43 minutes ago
I mean, re-industrialisation is kinda a bipartisan issue too, so reductions in trade barriers and some industrial policy stuff would add to that thesis. I doubt we'll see incentives close to the CHIPS act until the 2028 election though unfortunately
raresanevoice | an hour ago
Didn't we just see a correction of over a million jobs that were inaccurately counted as added? Curious to see in a few months just what the damage current policies did to the job market in '26 was.
Bullboah | an hour ago
No, the largest downward revision was about -110k.
Every jobs report gets revised by at least ~20-50k.
7/10 jobs reports so far this year have been revised up, 3 have been revised down.
ConcernHealthy876 | an hour ago
What’s the net net though?
Bullboah | an hour ago
After revisions total jobs added this year is around 700k.
Over 850K if you count the initial October report (based on +\- 50k average revisions, annual total so far is likely in the 800-900k)
__Geg__ | 56 minutes ago
The Hero we need.
Meme_Burner | 23 minutes ago
The jobs report + or - 50k jobs. That’s why 165k is an actual good number. Also the highest for this year?
Evolith | an hour ago
Life would be so much better if the corporations and billionaires actually implemented over a million new jobs. They keep us distracted through decent work, we get fed with a decent life. It's so simple. They'll easily choose anything but.
iAmTheWildCard | an hour ago
Is this satire..?
Technical-Revenue-48 | an hour ago
That’s literally what they have already done. You are living it.
Spiritual-Maybe-6720 | 8 minutes ago
At this point I am just waiting for the revision since its more then likely this number is heavily overstated especially in professional services category. Tend line is clear over the last 10 months its gets revised down
Marathon2021 | 44 minutes ago
Hahaha ... Donnie must be so pissed that this comes out literally 2 days after an absolute slaughter of the Republican party nationwide. Granted, this is one month and anything is possible in terms of "blips" on the radar in terms of job reports. But still, you just know it must be eating away at him that a decent number for the economy popped out just days after the mid-terms.
mtbdork | 7 minutes ago
I’m pretty sure voters by and large don’t really care about jobs numbers so much as their own personal economics and lived experiences.
Popular-Ordinary5110 | an hour ago
Is this at all effected by those layoffs of the people who calculate and keep track of these things I heard about back when Trump got into office? I remember people saying they wouldn't trust the numbers after Trump fired a bunch of economists. He was complaining a lot about people making him look bad by putting out bad numbers but I don't recall who he fired or hired.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
Nah, the best bellweather here is to see what economists are saying - especially those on the left. You’ve got people like Krugman and Sahm who are pretty openly liberal (Krugman basically being a political commentator at this point) and every one of them continues to express support for the BLS and it’s accuracy.
If you’re curious you can go to their website and click around, you can download piles and piles of raw data related to these reports, economists are constantly doing it for various analysis they’re working on. It would be effectively impossible to manipulate that data given the breadth and depth coupled with constant transparency without everyone knowing.
Runfasterbitch | an hour ago
Krugman is a hack who is partly responsible for encouraging the USA to believe in the fairy tale that is MMT
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
Krugman??
Absolutely not lmao. Krugman is the most neoclassical of neoclassicals, if anything he’s adherent to Keynesian principles beyond anything.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/25/opinion/running-on-mmt-wonkish.html
https://criticalfinance.org/2019/03/06/kelton-and-krugman-on-is-lm-and-mmt/
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/12/opinion/whats-wrong-with-functional-finance-wonkish.html
There’s just no way you’ve read anything from Krugman and thought he was an advocate for MMT.
>Krugman is a hack
Yeah, this and this really seems like the writing of a hack…
Bullboah | an hour ago
No, that’s just political huff. The jobs numbers were actually a bit better last year than they have been this year. Every initial report last year had to be revised down, while the majority (7/10) this year needed to be revised up.
Carpet-Early | an hour ago
Thank You Trump!!! We are truly in the GOLDEN AGE of economic growth all because of our president Donald J Trump's policies and the RADICAL Left does NOT want to admit this! (no sarcasm)
Econmajorhere | an hour ago
Yes! Trump is a genius. It’s his business ideas that are making so much money for the country. He also knows how to end ALL wars while he enjoys DECORATING our White House in his free time. What an incredible, beautiful man with an incredible ass. How JEALOUS are we of his wife having access to him every night????
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
SghettiAndButter | an hour ago
What does “radical” mean to you? Every time I hear “radical left” I’m thinking kickflips and x games
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
Fucking Texas is turning blue and the troglodytes on the right are still trying to pretend like anyone aside from senile Fox News addicts are buying the “radical left” line lol
bk7f2 | an hour ago
They use the term "radical left" to dehumanize opposition.
Carpet-Early | an hour ago
Higher taxes on the top 1%, wealth taxes, more welfare spending/social assistance, trans acceptance, and having the government step and be the sole provider in the pharmaceutical, medical and education industries
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
This is radical to you? Taking care of people? Having slightly higher taxes in the country with the lowest taxes of any developed nation? The audacity to suggest that the government need not regulate someone’s private parts?
Wait till you hear about land reforms….
Carpet-Early | an hour ago
Unfettered free market capitalism solves EVERYTHING
RIP_Soulja_Slim | an hour ago
But of course, just look at the Gilded age lol…
Marijuana_Miler | an hour ago
Can you point to a single time this has worked or have we just not tried attempted capitalism hard enough?
Carpet-Early | an hour ago
we have NEVER had true capitalism. only crony capitalism.
Marijuana_Miler | an hour ago
So if we have crony capitalism currently and then start removing more regulation and the methods that are available.
RIP_Soulja_Slim | 40 minutes ago
Somalia had completely free unfettered libertarian capitalism for decades, why no utopia?
SghettiAndButter | an hour ago
What happens when things like pouring waste and toxic chemicals into a local river is cheaper and produces more profit for a company than properly disposing of it. In an unfettered free market, what stops all the companies from just polluting our environment unchecked?
Carpet-Early | an hour ago
In a true free market, that would NEVER happen. Plus if that actually does happen, who cares! Climate change is a hoax.
SghettiAndButter | an hour ago
Ok now I know you’re just trolling. My bad for even bothering to feed you
Carpet-Early | an hour ago
i'm dead serious...
SghettiAndButter | an hour ago
“Who cares if our rivers get polluted” is not a serious response and I refuse to believe someone wants to live in an area with pollution on purpose
MaterialAstronaut298 | an hour ago
Its gotta suck being you
SghettiAndButter | an hour ago
Sounds good to me!
Carpet-Early | an hour ago
Sounds like you are part of the communist left agenda!
SghettiAndButter | an hour ago
Sounds like you don’t understand communism and just repeat what you hear on Facebook
jobmarketsucks | an hour ago
You're going to be paying taxes anyway. Might as well have the money go towards something that benefits people.
Also, I've met so many trans people in my life at this point. I can confidently say... they're just people. I can't think of a bigger non-issue.
I think you should just focus on your own life and not sit there seething over how other people live theirs. You might even make some friends.
yellowcloak | an hour ago
lol
poopbuttredditsucks | an hour ago
At one point in time over the past year there was a guy in this sub who went into detail about how these numbers are put together and how the data is collected. It has nothing to do with trump. I have no idea how to go about finding the post/posts where he explained it all. Maybe someone else (or that same guy) can expand on this.